No Copy

Don't stop now

"Don't stop now." It's a phrase I have been repeating to myself a number of times over the last weeks. Don't stop blogging, even though I have wanted to. The reason? Too much work. "Don't stop now." Don't stop reading, that is. Students' final papers, portfolios and a number of other assignments. That's why it's been awfully quiet on this blog for some time. And it will remain like that for some weeks to come.

[photo]

Anyway, luckily there is music to keep me going. Like the brand new Crowded House single. "Crowded House? I thought they split up ten years ago?" You're right. But a couple of months ago, they got back together again: Neil Finn on guitars and vocals, Nick Seymour on bass guitar, Mark Hart on piano and harmony, and new recruit Matt Sherrod on drums. There have already been some gigs, there was a webcast some weeks ago, and now there is a new single. What it's called? Right: Don't Stop Now.

[photo]

Produced by Steve Lillywhite , "Don't Stop Now" features the new Crowded House line-up plus a guest appearance on guitar by the legendary Johnny Marr. It has been announced as "a melodic tour de force, a hook-filled gem that gets better with every listen." You know what: I tend to agree... Just listen here, and tell me what you think.

On 2nd July, Crowded House will put out 'Time On Earth', their first release in over 10 years. The long-awaited new album contains 14 songs and, in old Crowded House tradition, the album cover features a Nick Seymour painting. Something to look forward to. If only because by then, the reading will have been finished...

 

Note: personally, I think Crowded House have always been underrated, especially by the so-called 'real' rock fans who think minor chords are for softies and who disregard any band that writes songs where melody is more important than riffs. Too bad: because as far as I am concerned, Neil Finn is one of the finest song writers of our times. But you have to be willing to listen with an open mind, of course...

Web 2.0, who cares?

I noticed this week that Andrea Weckerle has picked up blogging again (welcome 'back', Andrea). In her most recent post, she finds it really curious that some people would "ask where I'd gone. They didn't put my name into a search engine, which would've shown the recent hangouts. Instead, they must've just assumed that if I wasn't here l wasn't anywhere. What does that say about social networking sites and online communities? Well, it drives home the obvious point that while there is some overlap between friends/contacts across groups (and in the PR & social media circles probably more so than average), all-in-all it's less than one would expect."

I'd say she's got a point. Her observation also made me think about this quote I read some time ago on Threadwatch.org (via Jan van den Bergh):

  [photo]

"The title (viz. above, nocopy) isn't mine, it was from a 16 year-old kid that belongs to the wireless generation. His entire quote was,

“Web 2.0, dude, who cares, where’s Phone 2.0? The web is for old people and losers”.

What I've noticed is that teens are more connected than ever before, just not to the web, and usually not via PC. They don't care about 'social media' and Myspace was a fad. The kids I spoke to used it for two weeks or so, got bored and moved. Their 'social network' is real, and when they aren't together in 'real life' they stay connected with their cell phones. They aren't using Digg, Netscape, Facebook or "Web 2.0". Even the few that have blogs might post once or twice a month and even the self-admitted 'geeks' sad that the Web is like a big commercial.

A few of them shop on the Web, but it's word of mouth advertising that influence their purchases, not ads on Myspace or blogs, unless one of their friends happen to blog about something. All of them said they use cell phones and text messaging much more than they surf the Web or use messengers. I know they aren't the influencers now, but they will be. So where is all this social media stuff headed?"

You know what? Judging from how my students react to this web 2.0 'thing', this post on Threadwatch might be closer to the truth than most of us suspect... Or do you disagree?